Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32401198›Full record

ArticleeLife2020

Novel insights into breast cancer copy number genetic heterogeneity revealed by single-cell genome sequencing.

Timour Baslan, Jude Kendall, Konstantin Volyanskyy, Katherine McNamara, Hilary Cox, Sean D'Italia, Frank Ambrosio, Michael Riggs, Linda Rodgers, Anthony Leotta and 15 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

48 citing papers in PubMed, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Omics Technologies Improving Breast Cancer Research and Diagnostics.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

25 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Timour BaslanCold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5674-6432
Jude KendallCold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States.
Konstantin VolyanskyyPhilips Research North America, Biomedical Informatics, Cambridge, United States.
Katherine McNamaraDepartment of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, United States.
Hilary CoxCold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States.
Sean D'ItaliaCold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States.
Frank AmbrosioCold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States.
Michael RiggsCold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States.
Linda RodgersCold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States.
Anthony LeottaCold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States.
Junyan SongCold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States.
Yong MaoPhilips Research North America, Biomedical Informatics, Cambridge, United States.
Jie WuPhilips Research North America, Biomedical Informatics, Cambridge, United States.
Ronak ShahCenter for Molecular Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States.
Rodrigo Gularte-MéridaDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States.
Kalyani ChadalavadaMolecular Cytogenetics Core Facility, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States.
Gouri NanjangudMolecular Cytogenetics Core Facility, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States.
Vinay VaradanCase Comprehensive Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1520-1967
Assaf GordonHouse Gordon Software Company LTD, Calgary, Canada.
Christina CurtisDepartment of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, United States.
Alex KrasnitzCold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States.
Nevenka DimitrovaPhilips Research North America, Biomedical Informatics, Cambridge, United States.
Lyndsay HarrisCase Comprehensive Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, United States.
Michael WiglerCold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States.
James HicksCold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States.
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory · USMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USPhilips (United States) · USStanford University · USCase Western Reserve University · USNational Institutes of Health · USUniversity of Southern California · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
Single-Cell Biology Shared ResourceP30CA045508 · NCI · COLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY · PI John Edward Moses · 1987 to 2026
$118.9M
Integrated genomic analysis and multi-scale modeling of therapeutic resistanceR01CA182514 · NCI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI CURTIS, CHRISTINA N · 2014 to 2018
$2.4M
Department of Defense W81XWH-11-10747NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NCI NIH HHS P30 CA045508NCI NIH HHS R01 CA182514Susan G. Komen IIR13265578
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Copy number alterations (CNAs) play an important role in molding the genomes of breast cancers and have been shown to be clinically useful for prognostic and therapeutic purposes. However, our knowledge of intra-tumoral genetic heterogeneity of this important class of somatic alterations is limited. Here, using single-cell sequencing, we comprehensively map out the facets of copy number alteration heterogeneity in a cohort of breast cancer tumors. Ou/var/www/html/elife/12-05-2020/backup/r analyses reveal: genetic heterogeneity of non-tumor cells (i.e. stroma) within the tumor mass; the extent to which copy number heterogeneity impacts breast cancer genomes and the importance of both the genomic location and dosage of sub-clonal events; the pervasive nature of genetic heterogeneity of chromosomal amplifications; and the association of copy number heterogeneity with clinical and biological parameters such as polyploidy and estrogen receptor negative status. Our data highlight the power of single-cell genomics in dissecting, in its many forms, intra-tumoral genetic heterogeneity of CNAs, the magnitude with which CNA heterogeneity affects the genomes of breast cancers, and the potential importance of CNA heterogeneity in phenomena such as therapeutic resistance and disease relapse.

Indexed as

DNA Copy Number VariationsGene DosageGenetic HeterogeneityGenomicsSingle-Cell AnalysisWhole Genome SequencingBiomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsClinical Trials, Phase II as TopicFemaleGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansPhenotypePrognosisRNA-SeqBiomarkers, Tumorbreast cancercancercancer biologycopy number alterationsgeneticsgenomicshumansingle-cell sequencing

Identifiers

PMID32401198
PMCPMC7220379
OpenAlexW3025790441

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.